Now that we are getting toward the end of non-conference play, resumes continue to be built and start to get critiqued more. College basketball uses a lot more metrics compared to any other sport. It is tricky to navigate the different types of tools the NCAA committee uses to evaluate tournament teams.
The main two types of metrics are predictive and results based.
A results based metric is exactly how it sounds. It measures thefinal outcome by score, opponent quality and location.
An example of that is the KPI, similar to the Wins Against Bubble. The NCAA describes it as, "ranking every team's win and losses on a positive-to-negative scale."
Predictive metrics are where it starts to get a little tricky.
They are based on characteristics that are likely to lead to a desired outcome. That includes using offensive and defensive efficiency to project future team performance. KenPom, Torvik and the BPI are predictive metrics.
The NET rankings are actually both results based and predictive depending on what part you are looking at. The ranking itself is predictive, but the quad system is results based.
So how does the committee use these metrics?
In a statement released March 5, 2025, the NCAA stated, "The selection committee does not rely on a single metric, as outliers exist in every system. Instead, they consider multiple factors. The NET is one of many resources/tools available to the committee in the selection, seeding and bracketing process. Computer models cannot accurately evaluate qualitative factors such as games missed by key players or coaches, travel difficulties and other effects of specific games.
In a sport defined by small samples and emotional swings, results-based metrics tell the committee what has already happened, while predictive metrics help contextualize what those results truly mean. The clearest picture for selection purposes lives in the space between the two, where résumés are respected, but underlying indicators are used to assess sustainability and true quality. As the season unfolds, the committee tries to strike a balance between the two and be equipped to distinguish between fleeting success and tournament-worthy profiles.